Below is a model state voting rights act that may be modified for
passage in any state with a constitutional guarantee of the right to
vote. The statute adopts the substance of Section 2 of the federal
Voting Rights Act with a key exception: The geographic concentration of
the protected group is specifically excepted as a factor in recognizing
vote dilution claims. The U.S. Supreme Court instituted geographic
concentration as a precondition to recognizing vote dilution claims
under the Voting Rights Act in their holding in Thornburg v. Gingles.478 U.S. 30, 47 (1986). This ruling assumed that the only possible
remedy for vote dilution is the drawing of singe-member districts
guaranteeing the protected group a majority in at least one district.
Under the logic of Gingles if a viable majority district for a
protected minority group could not be drawn then no remedy was possible
and so no vote dilution claim should be recognized. However, this
ruling failed to take account of the possibility of proportional voting systems as remedies.

Proportional
voting systems involve at-large elections
without a winner-take all approach. The three most popular forms are
titled cumulative voting, limited voting, and choice voting. All three
systems provide cohesive minority groups with the opportunity
to elect representatives of their choice and have accomplished as much
already in various U.S. communities. The only factor which determines a
minority group’s electoral success under such systems is whether their
percentage of the population exceeds a “threshold of exclusion”, which
is calculated based on the number of seats to be filled. The geographic
distribution of the group is wholly irrelevant under these systems.
These systems can hence be applied to remedy vote dilution even when
the minority group is not geographically concentrated.

Under the federal Voting Rights Act, geographically dispersed minority
communities suffering from vote dilution with a potential full
representation remedy are unable to state a claim. They cannot reach
the remedy stage of litigation. The statue below would repair this flaw at the state level
and provide these communities with an opportunity to state a claim and
receive injunctive relief. The statute in no way inhibits the ability
of courts to order the drawing of single-member districts as a remedy
for vote dilution if appropriate. It only expands the menu of options
available to courts and litigating parties for remedying vote dilution
and works to protect the voting power of a wider swath of minority
communities.

MODEL STATE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

CHAPTER XX. Chapter XX (commencing with Section XXXX1) is added to Division XX of the Elections Code, to read:

CHAPTER XX RIGHTS OF VOTERS

XXXX1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the (State) Voting Rights Act of (year).XXXX2. As used in this chapter:

(a) ‘‘At-large method of election’’ means any of the following methods
of electing members to the governing body of a political subdivision:(1) One in which the voters of the entire jurisdiction elect the members to the governing body.(2) One in which the candidates are required to reside within given
areas of the jurisdiction and the voters of the entire jurisdiction
elect the members to the governing body.(3) One that combines at-large elections with district-based elections.

(b) ‘‘District-based elections’’ means a method of electing members to
the governing body of a political subdivision in which the candidate
must reside within an election district that is a divisible part of the
political subdivision and is elected only by voters residing within
that election district.

(c) ‘‘Political subdivision’’ means a geographic area of representation
created for the provision of government services, including, but not
limited to, a city, a county, a school district, a community college
district, or other district organized pursuant to state law.

(d) ‘‘Protected class’’ means a class of voters who are members of a
race, color or language minority group, as this class is referenced and
defined in the federal Voting Rights Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973 et seq.).

XXXX3. No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or
standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any
political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or
abridgement of the right of any citizen member of a protected class as
defined in section XXXX2 .

XXXX4: A violation of section XXXX3 is established if, based on
the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes
leading to nomination or election in the political subdivision are not
equally open to participation by members of a protected class as
defined section XXXX2 in that its members have less opportunity than
other members of the electorate to participate in the political process
and to elect representatives of their choice. The extent to which
members of a protected class have been elected to office in the State
or political subdivision is one circumstance that may be considered.

(a) The fact that members of a protected class are not geographically
compact or concentrated will not preclude finding a violation of
Section XXXX3, but may be a factor in determining an appropriate remedy.

(b) Proof of an intent on the part of the voters or elected officials
to discriminate against a protected class is not required to find a
violation of Section XXXX3.

XXXX5. Upon a finding of a violation of Section XXXX3 the court
shall implement appropriate remedies, which may include the imposition
of district-based elections or an at-large voting system that is
tailored to remedy the violation.

XXXX6. Any voter who is a member of a protected class and who
resides in a political subdivision where a violation of Section XXXX3
is alleged may file an action pursuant to those sections in the
superior court of the county in which the political subdivision is
located.

XXXX7. This chapter is enacted to implement the guarantees of (state constitutional provisions).

In Detroit, there have been three mayors in the past two years and the current one has come under scrutiny. Perhaps a system like instant runoff voting will help bring political stability to motor city.